Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
between commit:
8203e2d844d3 ("net: clear skb->tstamp in forwarding paths")
from the net tree and commit:
f839a6c92504 ("net: Do not route unicast IP packets twice")
from the net-next tree.
I fixed it up (I was not quite sure of the correct ordering - see below)
and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next
is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your
upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may
also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting
tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
index 4591ca4bdbe8,9d55ee33b7f9..000000000000
--- a/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
@@@ -378,7 -378,13 +378,14 @@@ static inline int ip6_forward_finish(st
__IP6_INC_STATS(net, ip6_dst_idev(dst), IPSTATS_MIB_OUTFORWDATAGRAMS);
__IP6_ADD_STATS(net, ip6_dst_idev(dst), IPSTATS_MIB_OUTOCTETS, skb->len);
+ #ifdef CONFIG_NET_SWITCHDEV
+ if (skb->offload_l3_fwd_mark) {
+ consume_skb(skb);
+ return 0;
+ }
+ #endif
+
+ skb->tstamp = 0;
return dst_output(net, sk, skb);
}
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 2:03 AM Ido Schimmel <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:31:06AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > 8203e2d844d3 ("net: clear skb->tstamp in forwarding paths")
> >
> > from the net tree and commit:
> >
> > f839a6c92504 ("net: Do not route unicast IP packets twice")
> >
> > from the net-next tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (I was not quite sure of the correct ordering - see below)
> > and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next
> > is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your
> > upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may
> > also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting
> > tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
>
> Looks good to me. Eric?
>
> Thank you!
Yes, SGTM, thanks.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:31:06AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 8203e2d844d3 ("net: clear skb->tstamp in forwarding paths")
>
> from the net tree and commit:
>
> f839a6c92504 ("net: Do not route unicast IP packets twice")
>
> from the net-next tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I was not quite sure of the correct ordering - see below)
> and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next
> is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your
> upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may
> also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting
> tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
Looks good to me. Eric?
Thank you!
Hi,
On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 00:01:57 +0200 Or Gerlitz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Just a note,
>
> e88afe759a49 ("net/mlx5e: Err if asked to mirror a goto chain tc eswitch rule")
>
> is from net and not net-next
Yeah, my mistake ...
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell